[ad_1]

Assignment Goal
The goal of this assignment is to write a case study analysis on the economics of an unhealthy behavior incorporating concepts we have covered in the course. Your paper must address each of the assignment components below.
Assignment Components
• Abstract
• Introduction
o Define an unhealthy behavior (smoking, heavy drinking, drug use or a behavior of your choice) and research the prevalence in the population. Focus on the socioeconomic determinants of education and income of those engaging in the unhealthy behavior. Consider including graphs that show the correlation of the behavior to education and income.
• Macroeconomic Consequences
o Discuss the impact the behavior has on the medical system, employment, education and wages.
• Price Elasticity
o Define price elasticity.
o How important is price as a determinant of the demand for cigarettes, alcohol, drugs or a product that contributes to the unhealthy behavior you selected? Is the demand for the products listed above sensitive to price (if the price increases does the unhealthy behavior decrease)?
• Consumer Behavior
o Identify one strategy for modifying the behavior by changing the choice architecture as described in Nudge.
• Innovation/Technology
o Research an example of how a digital tool is being used to provide value (cost of solution, patient experience, outcomes) to the following:
 Individuals engaging in the unhealthy behavior.
 The individual’s current doctor.
 The payer of the digital tool (an employer, an insurance company or a consumer). Who is paying for the tool and what value are they gaining?
o As care shifts to a value-based model, as opposed to fee-for-service, would this digital tool become more or less attractive or stay the same?
• Conclusion
o Brief overall summary
• References
Length and Formatting
• Write a 6 to 9 page paper (not including reference list).
• Include a minimum of 7 references in addition to the three text books. Sources must published documents from reputable journals and newspapers, do not rely on random website’s with information posted (those are not published documents).
• Use 12 point font, Times-Roman, double space, 1 inch margins.
• Follow APA formatting for in-text citations, references, and include an abstract (summary). No cover page or running-head required.
• See Case Study rubric Download Case Study rubricfor more details.

Rubric
Case Study Rubric 7025
Case Study Rubric 7025
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSubstantive Content 25 pts
Excellent
The issue is clearly stated, identification of facts that relate to the particular economics/financial aspects of the case are very well stated, identification of/or specific reference to applicable ethical and legal concepts are specified, specific case study questions are well-addressed. 21 pts
Good
The issue is understandably stated, identification of facts that relate to the particular economics/financial aspects of the case are stated, identification of/or specific reference to applicable ethical and legal concepts are specified, specific case study questions are addressed. 13 pts
Fair
The issue is vaguely stated, identification of facts that relate to the particular economics/financial aspects of the case are loosely stated, identification of/or specific reference to applicable ethical and legal concepts are somewhat specified, specific case study questions are weakly addressed. 8 pts
Poor
The issue is weakly stated, identification of facts that relate to the particular economics/financial aspects of the case are not stated, identification of/or specific reference to applicable ethical and legal concepts are specified, specific case study questions are not addressed.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalytical Ability 30 pts
Excellent
Original and creative arguments are presented when assessing the issues. Position is solidly stated, conclusions stated, application of the facts to the relevant economic/financial concepts are clearly stated, and more than 5 references are included. 25 pts
Good
Coherent thoughts are presented, position is stated, conclusions stated, application of the facts to the relevant economic/financial concepts are stated, and more than 5 references are included. 17 pts
Fair
Ambiguous thoughts are presented, position is unclear, conclusions are present, application of the facts to the relevant economic/financial concepts is somewhat unclear, and there are 5 references. 10 pts
Poor
There is a lack of clarity of thoughts in assessing the issues, and presenting a position. Conclusions are weakly stated or not present, and there is little to no application of reference to relevant economic/financial concepts, and there are less than 5 references.
30 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePerspective/Opinion 25 pts
Excellent
Personal opinion/position is clearly expressed, the position is supported by facts, original and creative arguments, and more than 5 references are presented to back up the position. 21 pts
Good
Personal opinion/position is understandably expressed, the position is supported by facts, cogent arguments, and there are more than 5 references to support the position. 13 pts
Fair
Personal opinion/position is vaguely expressed, the position is supported by vague arguments, and there are 5 references. 8 pts
Poor
Personal opinion/position is difficult to identify, the arguments do not support it, and there are less than 5 references.
25 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePresentation 20 pts
Excellent
Content is very well organized, there is strong evidence of coherence, readability, and clarity of expression; a logical flow is present, and spelling/grammar, APA standards. 15 pts
Good
Content is organized, there is moderate evidence of coherence, readability, and clarity of expression, and logical flow; and spelling/grammar, APA standards. (1-2 errors). 10 pts
Fair
Content is somewhat disorganized, evidence of coherence and readability, clarity of expression, and logical flow are weak, and spelling/grammar, APA standards (3-4 errors). 5 pts
Poor
Content is not organized, there little evidence of coherence, difficult to read, views are not clear, lack of logical flow, and attention to spelling/grammar, APA standards. (≥ 5 errors).
20 pts
Total Points: 100